Exell v. City of Chicago

Dist. Ct. erred in denying plaintiffs' request for issuance of preliminary injunction seeking to bar enforcement of portion of Chicago's Responsible Gun Owners Ordinance that prohibited all firing ranges within City. Dist. Ct erred in finding that certain organizational plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge instant ordinance, and in finding that instant ban did not violate anyone's Second Amendment rights. Moreover, Ct. of Appeals held that instant ban placed severe burden on core Second Amendment right of armed self-defense, especially where ordinance tied issuance of required gun permit to required training at firing range, and that defendant bore burden of establishing strong public-interest for justifying said ban. Ct. further found that issuance of preliminary injunction is appropriate where: (1) plaintiffs' challenge had strong likelihood of success on merits given that defendant failed to provide any evidence to establish that defendant's concerns about threats to public safety were realistic; (2) balance of harms favored plaintiffs; and (3) harm to plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights could not be remedied by damages.